Should Padi OW be called Resort Diver?

[DCBC]

...With very limited experience, how do you identify the limits of your training? What scenarios and foreseeable contingencies do you envision when balancing a self-assessment of your competency and skill-set against potential demands? Divers emerge from OW training as a product of a deliberate strategy to minimize risk assessment and awareness. That's sadly true. The OW course is very 'sugar-coated'. Instructors are taught to teach it that way. It results in more confident divers (lower drop-out rates) - but that confidence reflects a very rose-tinted reality. As such, it might be described as a false confidence...

I agree. For me, it comes down to the state of Diver (and Dive Leader) education, which in my view could stand some improvement. Some Instructors turn out divers that shouldn't be certified (imo). Perhaps they are just bad Instructors (every Agency has them), or they succumb to the demands of the LDS, fear for their jobs, or a number of other reasons. Either way, there are too many certified divers who are given a card and are a real danger to their Buddy and themselves (I'm sure we have all seen them).

So what should be done about this? Student Driver's in Nova Scotia can't carry passengers (one Instructor only). Newly licensed Driver's (probationary) cannot drive at night and both these categories have a 0 Alcohol requirement until completing a Defensive Driver Program and upgrading their license. In other words, the rights and privileges afforded to other Drivers are not afforded to them until they gain the experience and go through the process. This, or any other system isn't perfect, but it's a demonstrable effort to curb a known problem which has endangered people.

Divers have always disliked any Government intervention/regulation of their Sport. In 1958 (for example), the Ontario Underwater Council was formed from a group of 300 concerned Divers to evaluate and standardize training programs and discuss legislation concerning spear fishing. Laws pertaining to diving currently exist in Quebec, Israel and the EU (EN 14153-1/ISO 24801-1 for example). The extent of any future legislation has much to do with the direction the industry decides to take itself. Other regulation pertaining to wrecks, reefs, etc. and have been enacted in some areas.

Rather than rest on our laurels or give comments like "the Diver death rate hasn't gone up, so everything is fine;" how can things be improved? Diver retention rates are down. Some people that I've talked to have told me that they quit diving because they weren't adequately prepared (trained), or just felt uneasy with their level of competence. What can and should be done, or should we all just go with the flow?...

 

[Lorenzoid]

"Don't dive beyond your training and EXPERIENCE" is the admonition we often hear. Are you (OP) forgetting about the "experience" half of the equation? I don't care what title is printed on my C-card, but I would not be upset in the least if the front of my card said in big bold letters "I WILL NOT DIVE BEYOND MY TRAINING AND EXPERIENCE." This applies to divers of every level of training and experience.

Immediately after completing my OW training, no, I did not feel it was within my experience level to do everything that I learned to do (as an academic exercise) in the OW class, such as planning and executing a dive out in the open water without a divemaster or instructor present. I indeed felt fairly limited to calm conditions and dives accompanied by someone significantly more experienced than myself. Others may have felt differently. If at that point I had joined a dive club or otherwise had a mentor with whom to gain some experience, I would have progressed much faster than I did. But even at a gradual pace, I gained experience, and at some point I felt competent to do everything that I learned in OW training--probably some time after taking Rescue training. It seems perfectly normal to me that one's training and experience may not be in lock step with each other. Raw OW TRAINING did not mean I necessarily had OW EXPERIENCE. I have a card to evidence training, and a logbook to evidence experience.

The EXPERIENCE half of the equation is the key to why there is no need to call the class "Resort Diver." It may be one dive after OW training for some people and 50 dives after OW training for others, but at some point a diver will feel he has gained sufficient experience to do more than "resort diving."

 

[Bob DBF]

If training remained the same (as current OW), but only the need for supervision changed, then what really changes? Only the need for dive pros to take 'ownership' for their instructional handiwork. I think that's a really good idea...

The problem, quite frankly, is that OW training is degraded now and by moving the responsibility for the diver from the Instructor to a supervisory DM will invariably result in a continued lowering the bar for OW. The way I see it, the only way to improve the system is to have ongoing quality control of all dive professionals with their license in the balance. PADI has the structure and ability, but not the will.




Bob
--------------------------------------
I may be old, but I'm not dead yet.

 

[herbdb]

I am suprised that there are some many reasoned responses to what I thought was a snarky, anti-PADI troll post.

Its certainly true that you see many divers who appear marginally trained, but I think many of the divers unable or unwilling to dive unsupervised just don't dive enough. They got certified and then dive 8-10 dives a year on vacation. Of course they look like a trainwreck, they have little total experience and no recent experience. It is not necessarily the instructors or the training programs fault if they don't dive enough to be competent. I think its just a fact of life in a recreational industry.

This is why many shops require refresher training for those without recent experience.

 

[Wingy]

So what should be done about this? Student Driver's in Nova Scotia can't carry passengers (one Instructor only). Newly licensed Driver's (probationary) cannot drive at night and both these categories have a 0 Alcohol requirement until completing a Defensive Driver Program and upgrading their license. In other words, the rights and privileges afforded to other Drivers are not afforded to them until they gain the experience and go through the process. This, or any other system isn't perfect, but it's a demonstrable effort to curb a known problem which has endangered people.


We have similar laws for drivers here in Aus. If such a system were to be implemented again, logistically, how would one police this other than having the coast guard/search and rescue/MAF/what ever agency relevant to each country driving up and down the beaches all day and night? If in an ideal world this could be done, wouldnt it just create a situation like with driving with a blood alcohol content or a passenger in the car divers going sneaking past the patrolled areas at night?. If enforcing laws is enacted, who pays for the human resources required to provide compliance officers? would divers or dive shops pay the cost? Id like to think everyone is responsible and dives with their safety and that of their buddies foremost but have any examples of prohibiting something been successful?. If you prohibit diving without a card on you at all times, you will eventually get people deliberately diving outside of their designated area/time/conditions limitations on their resort diver card simply because humans generally dont like being told what to do.
Who would enforce the PADI standards of a resort diver card given by operations in SE Asia or Mexico (anywhere for that matter) - asking an industry to self regulate is going to be difficult when the person who walked past the door on their vacation is turned away because they want an OW card not a Resort Diver card and those few dollars or pesos or baht are the difference that day between breaking even and being in the red. A dive op relying on resort customers in low season is going to more than likely take what they can rather than turn people away.

Re Industry retention rates - how many people play a game of golf or two in their lifetime v how many people join golf clubs, buy clubs and a buggy, buy a funky outfit and play golf religiously? how many people do a tandem sky dive v become hardcore wingsuit jumpers? on vacation how many people go and ride an elephant v how many people give up all their worldly goods and commit themselves to volunteering at elephant sanctuaries on a diet of mung beans and brown rice?. People who decide to discover the underwater world on holiday in Borocay are not all going to follow a certification path and buy equipment and carry on diving for the rest of their lives. Just playing devils advocate

 

[DCBC]

...Immediately after completing my OW training, no, I did not feel it was within my experience level to do everything that I learned to do (as an academic exercise) in the OW class, such as planning and executing a dive out in the open water without a divemaster or instructor present. I indeed felt fairly limited to calm conditions and dives accompanied by someone significantly more experienced than myself. Others may have felt differently. If at that point I had joined a dive club or otherwise had a mentor with whom to gain some experience, I would have progressed much faster than I did...

Thanks for the honest answer. I think that this can be a problem. Like in your case, Instructors certify Divers who are not prepared to dive unsupervised without first gaining more experience. Yet the certification should only be issued when the Diver possesses this ability. It's the Instructor's responsibility to prepare the Diver to the level required by the certifying Agency before the card is issued.

There is no doubt that each of us continue to learn with experience. The point is that at what point in the process do we satisfy the certification requirements (regardless what they are)? If there is a tendency in the industry to certify Divers who do not meet the requirements, perhaps it's time to change the requirements (or the program to meet the requirements).

The EXPERIENCE half of the equation is the key to why there is no need to call the class "Resort Diver." It may be one dive after OW training for some people and 50 dives after OW training for others, but at some point a diver will feel he has gained sufficient experience to do more than "resort diving."

A Diver currently certified as a Resort Diver can gain this experience too.

---------- Post added May 20th, 2013 at 01:13 PM ----------

If enforcing laws is enacted, who pays for the human resources required to provide compliance officers?

I would suggest that the industry should police itself. Historically, it's when this isn't done that specific laws are often enacted.

Law may also be put in-place for symbolic reasons (without actual prosecutions taking place), for example speeding is illegal in many jurisdictions yet police usually ignore motorists who are 5-10 miles an hour over the legal limit. Some sex crimes can be illegal in certain jurisdictions (homosexuality and buggery for example), however this isn't always enforced if the act is between two consenting adults. Laws which are symbolic typically attempt to persuade rather than enforce, punish or prevent. At other times, legislation indicates reasonable practice that may be used as a guideline in Civil Court.

Re Industry retention rates - how many people play a game of golf or two in their lifetime v how many people join golf clubs, buy clubs and a buggy, buy a funky outfit and play golf religiously? how many people do a tandem sky dive v become hardcore wingsuit jumpers? ... Just playing devils advocate

The duffer isn't likely to kill himself on the golf course and the tandem sky dive is supervised. I think it has more to do with the unsupervised aspect of an OW Diver.

 

[boulderjohn]

Its certainly true that you see many divers who appear marginally trained, but I think many of the divers unable or unwilling to dive unsupervised just don't dive enough. They got certified and then dive 8-10 dives a year on vacation. Of course they look like a trainwreck, they have little total experience and no recent experience. It is not necessarily the instructors or the training programs fault if they don't dive enough to be competent. I thing its just a fact of life in a recreational industry.

It is a fact of life pretty much everywhere.

If you look at my college transcript, you will see that I passed Freshman calculus. I have a friend who also passed calculus at almost the same time. The difference between us is that he became an engineer, and I became an English teacher and school administrator. And so, nearly 45 years later, he is still pretty good with calculus, and I haven't got a clue. Do we conclude that his instruction was superior to mine? Should my college intervene and revoke my passing calculus grade from my transcript because I can't do it now?

When you leave your training with any agency, what happens next has a profound influence on your diving. My first two years of diving after certification were spent in Cozumel, where dives must be DM-led by law, and where the DMs set up your gear, etc. When I then dived in South Florida, it took me most of the boat ride out to realize no DM was going to set my gear up for me, and no DM was going to guide me in the water and get me back to the boat. I had to scramble to remember how to set up my own gear, and I had to think really hard about navigation. If I had spent the first two years in Florida instead of Cozumel, I would have been a very different diver at that point, and that difference would have nothing to do with my initial certification.

Not long ago I taught a scuba refresher course for 8 people. Of that 8, 6 had so little trouble that they really didn't need a refresher, and 2 of them were so close to hopeless that they should have taken the entire course over again. The 6 who did very well were all PADI graduates. The 2 hopeless divers were both NAUI trained. Do I use that as conclusive proof of the superiority of PADI training over NAUI, or do I attribute the difference to the fact that all the PADI divers had dived fairly recently, while the 2 NAUI divers had not been under water in 11 years?

 

[DevonDiver]

If you look at my college transcript, you will see that I passed Freshman calculus. I have a friend who also passed calculus at almost the same time. The difference between us is that he became an engineer, and I became an English teacher and school administrator. And so, nearly 45 years later, he is still pretty good with calculus, and I haven't got a clue. Do we conclude that his instruction was superior to mine? Should my college intervene and revoke my passing calculus grade from my transcript because I can't do it now?

When you leave your training with any agency, what happens next has a profound influence on your diving.

Your analogy speaks to me of the benefit of a 'resort diver' (supervised-only) type qualification. Furthermore, the potential benefit of such a qualification being of finite duration.

Such a qualification permits an initial investigation of scuba diving (do I like it or not?), along with ample opportunity to develop experience and competency in core scuba skills (whilst retaining the safety of a supervised activity). When the diver feels ready to ditch that supervision, they can opt for further training that provides increased competency in the skill-set thus far supplemented by professional supervisors.

With regards to the duration of qualification - it makes no sense that a diving qualification is for life. Agencies do recommend frequent refresher training - and this is an appropriate recourse to negating skill-fade through inactivity. However, the reality is that the scuba industry does not evenly mandate the need for refresher training. Requirements to refresh training are very regionally biased.

 

[dbulmer]

Standards of diver competence might increase if OW instructors are responsible for teaching only and not the certification process which should be performed by external examiners.

Any thoughts?

 

[Peter Guy]

Andy (DD) wrote

Agencies do recommend frequent refresher training - and this is an appropriate recourse to negating skill-fade through inactivity. However, the reality is that the scuba industry does not evenly mandate the need for refresher training. Requirements to refresh training are very regionally biased.

OK, I still want to know where individual responsibility comes in.

Do people who haven't been diving "in a while" really, honestly, believe they can just jump into the water and everything will automatically come back to them?